3 ms·

I don't have any respect for ZodTTD. For years he's been taking open source software and reselling it on Cydia with no attribution for the original authors. As

I don't have any respect for ZodTTD. For years he's been taking open source software and reselling it on Cydia with no attribution for the original authors. As far as I'm concerned, he's a thief.

dexen 15y ago
> As far as I'm concerned, he's a thief. Oh really? If they violated licencing terms, drop a mail the EFF[1] guys and they'll help to sort it out. They already have helped in sorting out a bunch of cases, most often amicably. If ZodTTD conformed to the licensing terms, what's your point? It's the original developer that picks particular license -- wide is variety available already, covering most grounds. [1] http://www.eff.org/ http://www.eff.org/
- brigade 15y ago
  EFF only does stuff if an actual copyright holder asks them to (and signs a legally binding thing as such), not random internet people.
  - zodttd 15y ago
    I received a great contact at the EFF during their help towards fighting to maintain legality of "jailbreaking" of the iPhone.
- fungi 15y ago
  >If ZodTTD conformed to the licensing terms, what's your point? He apparently provides no evidence of this and is removing comments from his blog that question the claim... so i'm skeptical.
  - zodttd 15y ago
    The author names were the reason for removing those posts, as I noted in my comment. Really that post has nothing to do with open source, and these matters can be handled by emailing me directly if it's such a concern, as I noted.
    - fungi 15y ago
      props for sticking up for yourself in a public forum (and i should stop bitching about some guy and some product i know next to nothing about) but really i'm not seeing why you can't address the issue that every one seems to have it in for you on. personally i'll grab the popcorn and stfu, if the copyright holders have issues with your distribution i'll let them handle it.
      - zodttd 15y ago
        Appreciate this. I didn't know there were that many people with this mindset until just recently. I've had my GitHub for quite awhile. I will definitely be in full compliance if I freshen up my sources to the latest versions on a couple projects there, and remove a Cydia Store project (as I've just been made aware of). That's the extent of this issue.
barrkel 15y ago
I'm wading into something I have absolutely no background on, but I want to say something about the "shape" of what is happening here, not necessarily related to its exact specifics. In a situation where there is a free (as in beer) product, and someone comes along and then sells it "for a quick buck", they are not automatically thieves - they are in fact doing the work of the free market by promoting and spreading the product. Their value add is in packaging, distribution, advertising, etc. Now, if things are done without attribution in contravention of licenses etc., then it's straight up illegal and wrong. I just wanted to point out that selling something which is normally free is not automatically immoral or ripping people off.
- ktsmith 15y ago
  The snes9x software that zong was distributing is largely under a custom license that only grants use for non-commercial purposes. Getting that re-licensed would be difficult due to the large number of devs. You can read more about that situation on the snes9x forums. ZodTTD from his own statements had a trademark violation on one of Sony's marks. According to other developers he was committing license violations. Combining the two he's in violation of the android market terms that he agreed to. Any way you slice it the termination of his market account was well within Google's rights. Here's part of the agreement for developers on the android market that applies to this situation: 7.2 Google Takedowns. While Google does not intend, and does not undertake, to monitor the Products or their content, if Google is notified by you or otherwise becomes aware and determines in its sole discretion that a Product or any portion thereof or your Brand Features; (a) violates the intellectual property rights or any other rights of any third party; (b) violates any applicable law or is subject to an injunction; (c) is pornographic, obscene or otherwise violates Google's hosting policies or other terms of service as may be updated by Google from time to time in its sole discretion; (d) is being distributed by you improperly; (e) may create liability for Google or Authorized Carriers; (f) is deemed by Google to have a virus or is deemed to be malware, spyware or have an adverse impact on Google's or an Authorized Carrier's network; (g) violates the terms of this Agreement or the Market Content Policy for Developers; or (h) the display of the Product is impacting the integrity of Google servers (i.e., users are unable to access such content or otherwise experience difficulty), Google may remove the Product from the Market or reclassify the Product at its sole discretion. Google reserves the right to suspend and/or bar any Developer from the Market at its sole discretion. Google enters into distribution agreements with device manufacturers and Authorized Carriers to place the Market software client application for the Market on Devices. These distribution agreements may require the involuntary removal of Products in violation of the Device manufacturer's or Authorized Carrier's terms of service. In the event that your Product is involuntarily removed because it is defective, malicious, infringes intellectual property rights of another person, defames, violates a third party's right of publicity or privacy, or does not comply with applicable law, and an end user purchased such Product within a year before the date of takedown,: (i) you must refund to Google, all amounts received, plus any associated fees (i.e. chargebacks and payment transaction fees), and (ii) Google may, at its sole discretion, withhold from your future sales the amount in subsection (i) above.

I don't have any respect for ZodTTD. For years he's been taking open source software and reselling it on Cydia with no attribution for the original authors. As far as I'm concerned, he's a thief.

dexen 15y ago

> As far as I'm concerned, he's a thief. Oh really? If they violated licencing terms, drop a mail the EFF[1] guys and they'll help to sort it out. They already have helped in sorting out a bunch of cases, most often amicably. If ZodTTD conformed to the licensing terms, what's your point? It's the original developer that picks particular license -- wide is variety available already, covering most grounds. [1] http://www.eff.org/ http://www.eff.org/

brigade 15y ago
EFF only does stuff if an actual copyright holder asks them to (and signs a legally binding thing as such), not random internet people.
- zodttd 15y ago
  I received a great contact at the EFF during their help towards fighting to maintain legality of "jailbreaking" of the iPhone.
fungi 15y ago
>If ZodTTD conformed to the licensing terms, what's your point? He apparently provides no evidence of this and is removing comments from his blog that question the claim... so i'm skeptical.
- zodttd 15y ago
  The author names were the reason for removing those posts, as I noted in my comment. Really that post has nothing to do with open source, and these matters can be handled by emailing me directly if it's such a concern, as I noted.
  - fungi 15y ago
    props for sticking up for yourself in a public forum (and i should stop bitching about some guy and some product i know next to nothing about) but really i'm not seeing why you can't address the issue that every one seems to have it in for you on. personally i'll grab the popcorn and stfu, if the copyright holders have issues with your distribution i'll let them handle it.
    - zodttd 15y ago
      Appreciate this. I didn't know there were that many people with this mindset until just recently. I've had my GitHub for quite awhile. I will definitely be in full compliance if I freshen up my sources to the latest versions on a couple projects there, and remove a Cydia Store project (as I've just been made aware of). That's the extent of this issue.

barrkel 15y ago

I'm wading into something I have absolutely no background on, but I want to say something about the "shape" of what is happening here, not necessarily related to its exact specifics. In a situation where there is a free (as in beer) product, and someone comes along and then sells it "for a quick buck", they are not automatically thieves - they are in fact doing the work of the free market by promoting and spreading the product. Their value add is in packaging, distribution, advertising, etc. Now, if things are done without attribution in contravention of licenses etc., then it's straight up illegal and wrong. I just wanted to point out that selling something which is normally free is not automatically immoral or ripping people off.

ktsmith 15y ago
The snes9x software that zong was distributing is largely under a custom license that only grants use for non-commercial purposes. Getting that re-licensed would be difficult due to the large number of devs. You can read more about that situation on the snes9x forums. ZodTTD from his own statements had a trademark violation on one of Sony's marks. According to other developers he was committing license violations. Combining the two he's in violation of the android market terms that he agreed to. Any way you slice it the termination of his market account was well within Google's rights. Here's part of the agreement for developers on the android market that applies to this situation: 7.2 Google Takedowns. While Google does not intend, and does not undertake, to monitor the Products or their content, if Google is notified by you or otherwise becomes aware and determines in its sole discretion that a Product or any portion thereof or your Brand Features; (a) violates the intellectual property rights or any other rights of any third party; (b) violates any applicable law or is subject to an injunction; (c) is pornographic, obscene or otherwise violates Google's hosting policies or other terms of service as may be updated by Google from time to time in its sole discretion; (d) is being distributed by you improperly; (e) may create liability for Google or Authorized Carriers; (f) is deemed by Google to have a virus or is deemed to be malware, spyware or have an adverse impact on Google's or an Authorized Carrier's network; (g) violates the terms of this Agreement or the Market Content Policy for Developers; or (h) the display of the Product is impacting the integrity of Google servers (i.e., users are unable to access such content or otherwise experience difficulty), Google may remove the Product from the Market or reclassify the Product at its sole discretion. Google reserves the right to suspend and/or bar any Developer from the Market at its sole discretion. Google enters into distribution agreements with device manufacturers and Authorized Carriers to place the Market software client application for the Market on Devices. These distribution agreements may require the involuntary removal of Products in violation of the Device manufacturer's or Authorized Carrier's terms of service. In the event that your Product is involuntarily removed because it is defective, malicious, infringes intellectual property rights of another person, defames, violates a third party's right of publicity or privacy, or does not comply with applicable law, and an end user purchased such Product within a year before the date of takedown,: (i) you must refund to Google, all amounts received, plus any associated fees (i.e. chargebacks and payment transaction fees), and (ii) Google may, at its sole discretion, withhold from your future sales the amount in subsection (i) above.